That’s it!... Enough is enough!!... After years of not pleading either of the cognate statements in Proverb 26:4 & 5 for the incredulously nonsensical statements made by, particularly, SDA Preachers, who could, and should, know better, this is literally the ‘drop that makes my cup overflow!’ It is almost the default stance of SDA Preachers, in an attempt to address difficult/controversial passages to engage in a “smoke and mirrors” approach, (at best), or use diversionary, denigrating tactics all in order to not have to admit that they really do not have an answer. The other option is to try to “dumb down” a discussion (ala: ‘the square root of 2 is simply 1’) so that the involved, core issues may actually never surface. In the light of the many available and accessible Adventist Colleges and Universities within the Denomination, resorting to such “dumbing down” attitude has absolute no acceptable rationalization, excuse or justification.
It was a simple as that SDA Preachers! Your diversionary smoke can be blown away, and your mirrors discarded!
And so, again here hearing SDA preachers trying to rationalize away this passage with their patent odd, disturbing, blatantly nonsensical and/or exegetically deficient arguments has nonetheless been an entertaining sideshow in itself. Even foolingly “valiant” attempts, such as the recent one by John Bradshaw in the It is Written Revelation Today series (01-31-2012 [mp4] [54:32-56:00]), with its glib “contextualizing” approach, as both SDA Preachers, and the by now, conditionedly, dull/shallow-thinking, Church membership ignoramusly prefer, (which is why the grossly inaccurate KJV, and even the still deficient NKJV translations are so popular amongst them), -indeed as spuriously normatively encouraged by the Church’s leadership (cf. a related NAD response in this document p. 279, end of paragraph 1), for: ‘if it, selectively/excisingly so, makes perfect sense to them, then it must be the incontrovertible, concrete truth’, all falls flat on its face in the light of the fact that the indeed ‘controlling contradicting statement’ in 1 Thess 4:14 is indifferently being, falsely simplistically, glibly ignored. The Great Controversy reality, is that such “cotton-candy”, however fluffy, insubstantive and empty-calorie arguments will not withstand the all out final assault against the Truth which the Devil is no doubt preparing. And even in regions where people would preferentially not have been presented with deeply rooted Biblical Truths, but merely the typical shallow, surface arguments such as these ones, and that, not even by their local pastor after they have become Church members, you can count on people of learning on the “opposing” side then to quite successfully expose those fatal flaws and deficiencies in those glib SDA arguments. Those “False Shepherds” in the SDA Church (=Ezek 34:1-22) who, even if they have ‘drunk of the clear waters prefer to foul the rest with their feet’ (Ezek 34:17-19 = EW 36.2), as, as also discussed in this post, typically/typologically did the corrupt leadership of the Church during the Third Church Era (Rev 6:5-6), will surely reap their just punishing reward for having thus slothfully and indifferently caused the eternal loss of millions, including within their own SDA Church circles, having also caused many to accept what is actually the Full Mark of the Beast. And thus will be fulfilled with them, their, as revealed in this post at the Sixth Plague, seamlessly inclusive, tier, third-part of the final Babylon power’s “False Prophet” role, as prophesied in GC 654.4-655.4!!
Christ’s parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus has been a prominently cited reason why most Christians believe in conscious life after death, however succinctly said here, it is hard to believe that Jesus endorsed the Greco-Roman mythology of Hades. Then why did He make such pervasive thematic mention of it in this parable? A simple answer can be understood when the main point which Jesus was trying to make with this parable (Luke 16:31) is rightly held as the paramount/controlling idea for this parable. (Cf. in this post)
It was not unlike Christ to use a fictitious scenario/story to convey his teaching points, all the while maintaining His justly desired veiling of the pointed truth for hearers who were of bad faith (Matt 13:10-16). The problem with this specific truth of ‘the Jews being in danger of being condemned by God for their haughty and neglectful attitude and actions towards the poor,’ was that speaking it in a parable would have to involve “unveilable” and readily understandable elements and characters according to the Jewish/Biblical theological beliefs, such as: the judgement at the end of time, God being that judge, etc. The parable in a straightforward context would also go against the belief of the Jews that death was an unconscious sleep. So it was then in the Greco-Roman teaching on Hades, (as basically reflected in the famous “Discourse on Hades”, -which, contrary to a common assumption/belief/thesis (cf. here), may not have been written by Josephus, but rather, initially, by a non-Christian (“Greek”), and then later emended and embellished by a Christian, moreover, circularly enough, drawing many elements in Christ’s parable in Luke 16:19-31, manifestly confusedly thinking that Christ had didactically expressed it.), ruled by the, namesake, god of the “underworld” and, pertinently enough, “riches,” and which was a place of conscious life after death and torment, with a possibility of returning to the realm of the living and interacting with them, that Jesus found the best fictional backdrop in which to literally dissimulate probably his most pointed teaching and warning, especially in the light of the soon to follow, greatest miracle in the raising of Lazarus, which He evidently was Divinely made aware ahead of time would transpire.
So in summary, this parable was only used by Jesus (1) because the Jewish teaching on the involved issues could not be used to make teaching point and warning He wanted to make, and (2) also it allowed Him to make this most pointed warning to the rebellious Jews in His still desired “mysterious” way.*
* As an example, if I want to give a similar “veiled”, (and that also through seeming mere humor), warning to SDA’s about being worshipfully materialistic, I could reach into “Babylon’s” belief and make my point through a “Saint Peter at the gate” joke puzzledly asking people why they had packed “pavement” (i.e., gold) for their move to Heaven. I certainly do not believe several elements in that joke, but it best gets my point across, including variously concealedly, i.e., especially for those, who like the Pharisees in Christ’s time, probably superficially objected to Christ’s point here because it involved several elements which, (ironically (Luke 16:31), -and perhaps deliberately so by Jesus) they knew were not according to the “Law and Prophets”.
As there were many Special/Feast days in Old Testament Israel that were to be observed as the Seventh Day Sabbath of the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:8-11; cf. Gen 2:2, 3) was, by being "a holy convocation" and/or "doing no laborious work", namely: Feast of Unleavened Bread (Lev 23:7, 8); Feast of Weeks Sabbaths (Lev 23:15, 16); Waving of Firstfruits (Lev 23:20, 21); Feast of Trumpets (Lev 23:24-25); Day of Atonement (Lev 16:31; 23:27-32); Feast of Booths (Lev 23:34-36); (cf. Sabbatical Year (Lev 25:2-6ff)), then the mention here of ‘sabbath days (plural) which are shadows and type of Christ' is a specific reference to these ‘complete rest' days stipulated in the Law of Moses. Their observance is indeed optional in the New Covenant (See ‘Feast Books' below. This website also has interesting information, e.g., a possible OT background for this statement in Ezek 45:17. Indeed these ceremonial rituals now cannot, since this Messiah has come (cf. Gal 2:15-21), no longer serve to ‘tutoringly guide’ (Gal 3:19-26) the sinner into cleansing the ‘handwritten certificate of record of debt for sins, (-distinctly pointed out by the Law (Rom 3:20) chiefly derived from the foundational Ten Commandments (Rom 7:7-13)), that was against them’ (Col 2:14-15).) See more on this passage, and other ones about the Sabbath in this post.
To Be Added To...
Some Exegetical Snippets
Gen 15:6|Gal 3:6|Rom 4:3, 9, 21-22|James 2:23 - The singular statement in these passage which says that: "Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him as righteousness" is often left out of a "Righteousness by Faith" discussion, however, especially NT writers, saw this as inherent/fundamental to the understanding of this teaching. Here, a slight paradigm shift based upon this foundational example of Abraham does indeed help to see this doctrine in its proper light. It results in the more accurate understanding of "Righteousness because of Faith." (cf. Rom 10:9-10) I.e., because Abraham chose to believe God in the incredible promise of having a son, in pertinently, his wife's past-childbearing age, and because he simultaneously also chose to believe that he would possess the land of Canaan and become a vast nation in it, and he concretely acted on this belief as he set off on a quite precarious sojourn from his homeland towards this promised Land, then, despite some faults along this journey, because he held on to this faith and concretely pursued the promise, even through an ultimate test in the requested sacrifice of the now nearly adult-aged Promised son, ‘Righteousness was credited to him because of this concrete, persisted and proven Faith.' Otherwise it would have been, (and would be), by works. (Cf. this post for more (“Abraham” Section); also: this 2009 sermon by Mark Howard pointedly on this underemphasized element in the RBF discussion).
2 Corinthians 12:7-9 - The response to Paul's prayer about his "thorn in the flesh" is often, rather, poetically, quoted, but is it really accurately understood. Succinctly said here, as the key Greek word here charis does not strictly mean "sin-forgiving/pardoning grace" but actually "great, even unmerited, favor" what God told Paul in this response was that: ‘His great favor that was being bestowed on Paul through the many "great revelations" he was receiving was sufficient for him.' (Indeed Paul's pivotal and radical writings and theology has greatly helped to focus and guide the theology of the New Covenant that was established by Christ.) He thus did not need any additional human strength or skills to more powerfully convey these revelations for indeed ‘power is more fully recognized in weakness.' Paul praised God for these weaknesses of his, which he now understood did not at all hinder his ministry, but made his contributions more directly attributable to God (vs. 9b), especially with those who wanted to see through these superficial weaknesses.
A similar ‘fuller power in weakness' was seen when God chose the "weakest of the weak" for an end-time prophetic ministry in Ellen White. She repeatedly complained of not being more skilled, educated, or a (Biblical) scholar, yet her writings and counsels were in this way similarly seen as being Divinely as what she said consistently passed the test of scrutiny and scholarly examination, even in temporal (e.g., scientific) matters. (See some Biblical exegesis examples in this post).
Galatians 3:28-29 (Contra Futurist-Dispensationalism) - "And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's descendants, heirs according to promise." (Gal 3:29 & vss. 7-9; cf. Rom 2:28-29; Eph 3:4-6) What Promise? The enduring promise given to Abraham in Gen 12:1-3 (Rom 4:13-25; cf. vss. 9-12; cf. Heb 11:8, 9). The New Testament (i.e., Covenant) Church is God's enduring Israel. (Jer 31:31-33 = Heb 10:16).
The Order of the Temptations of Christ (Matt 4:1-11 vs Luke 4:1-13) - Some may have noticed that there is an apparent contradiction between Matthew's and Luke's gospels concerning the sequential order of Christ's temptations. Matthew has what would be a 1-2-3 order (Matt 4:3f; 5, 6f; 8ff); while Luke has a 1-3-2 order (Luke 4:3f; 5, 6ff; 9ff). What appears to have been the case here, based on a comparative study of various Greek manuscripts of these passages, is that Jesus was not tempted only 3 times but actually 4 times, but with only three temptations. Temptation #3 (bowing before the devil to (painlessly) regain the kingdoms of the world) was apparently brought before Jesus twice (Matt 4:8ff & Luke 4:5ff). This is made evident by the following 4 textual and contextual indications succinctly, simply listed here: (1) Textual evidence shows that Christ’s statement “Get thee behind Me, Satan!” was not said after the second Temptation as solely, in modern/common versions, the KJV wrongly indicates; (2) Matthew emphatically introduced his third (=4th) temptation with the term “again”; (3) unlike the other two temptations which are practically verbatim in both Matthew and Luke, the text of these 2nd (Luke 4:5) and 4th (Matt 4:8) temptations are not so similar; and (4) in the first mention of this 2nd temptation in Luke, Christ is “led up” (assumedly, physically to some high vantage point) and shown the kingdoms of the inhabited world’ (Greek: ‘oikoumene’), while in the renewed attempt with this 2nd (now 4th and heightened) temptation Christ is now taken to ‘an exceedingly high mountain and shown the kingdoms of the entire world/planet’ (Greek: ‘kosmos’). Matthew’s irregular, though purposely allowable, use of Greek present tenses for both the verbs: “took” (= “led up”) and “showed” is manifestly because they are syntactically functioning here as iterative presents in order to emphatically relate the once-“repeated” action for this re-tempting.
Investigative Judgement - First of all, do, precursorily, see this exposition. Then, contrary to (false) “logic” with which many reject the Biblical (including the SOP) teaching of the Investigative Judgement, most significantly, so called, “Progressive Adventists” (who, at least, should, for objective, substantive reasons, be renamed “Redactive Adventists”), God is not waiting for the completion of the judgement on the Living in order to return (see e.g., the (spiritually shallow/moronic) “computational argument” made in this (Spectrum Magazine) article), but rather, based on many Biblical passages such as 2 Pet 3:9, Ezek 33:11, Deut 30:19, He is actually waiting until all those who are alive around the globe equally come to full a first hand knowledge and understanding of what the final, eternal “life and death” issues are all about. Then a judgement on the living can begin to be completed. It is thus not surprising that those who already know these truths are the first to go through that judgement (cf. 1 Pet 4:17), indeed being judged by how they have responded to that fully understood light vs. the 6.5+ billion currently in the world who do not. So the investigative judgement, which probably has the power/capability to most transparently process hundreds of millions, even billions in a day, and, following partial previous, “investigations” may indeed have all still open/pending cases be entirely “wrapped up” in the short time between ‘the close of probation and Christ’s leaving of (the Sanctuary’s Most Holy in) Heaven to return,’ when then Jesus would have ceased His intercession for sinners (GC 613ff), may have been forced to trickle down to a Heavenly, most annoyingly, lethargic pace of the ca. 225,000 who die daily around the world, thus naturally closing/sealing their open/pending cases, being judged according to the light that they have come to know. So it is indeed pointedly because God’s people have not done what they can to make this final warning message be fully, thoroughly and properly known to the entire world, to every tribes, tongue, nation and people, that the Investigative Judgement is dragging on, and not “moronically” ‘because it makes no (Divine/Biblical) sense.’ Moreover, and quite probably, even worse, as the investigative judgement is pointedly for those who have claimed the name of Jesus while there is still a “pre-advent” judgement for others, apparently based on the prima facie case of their “works” (Rev 22:12) and thus not requiring the same amount of time and depth of deliberation as the investigative judgement, (e.g., go to trial vs. being summarily resolved), this all may indeed be much worse, where the Heavenly Intelligence is then awaiting for the Everlasting Gospel and the Three Angels Message (Rev 14:6-13) to be clearly and unequivocally made known amongst pointedly the world’s 2.2+ Billion Christian believers. (EW 254.1)
Most Christians reject the teaching of the investigative judgement because they think it is unnecessary even contrary to New Testament theology. But the following succinct logic flow shows how it is clearly taught in the NT, based on pertinent/applicable parts of the rest of the Bible (cf. here):
Matthew 10:23 - Contrary to my own prior not fully accurate understanding of the statement of Christ in this verse (cf. here), based on the NASB rendering as:
Some Recommended Resources
The Works and Ministry of Samuel K. Pipim (Ph.D)
Dr. Pipim is (of course, pre-fall/lapse-excluding (cf. here)....Really!????) one of the best examples of how a degree from SDA Theological Seminary should integrally and relevantly translate into practical and educational ministry to Church Members, especially in our day and “age,” i.e., this “Age of UnReason”. See his: Website, Books, Audio and/or Video Sermons. (....And, ironically enough, his fall was itself an act “unreason”.).
The Works and Ministry of Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi (Ph.D.)
In this line of given credit where credit is due, the scholarly works of the late Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi of 16+ books and hundreds of articles are quite certainly, most valuable resources to any Bible Student’s library. As it was said at his funeral: “A great tree has fallen in Israel.” Dr. Bacchiocchi’s writings can be purchased, and some accessed, on his still-maintained and operated, Biblical Perspectives website.
Video of Dr. Bacchiocchi’s Sabbath Enrichment Seminars, including his thrilling testimony of his highly commended studies at the Vatican’s Pontifical Gregorian University (the first and, as a result, only Protestant to do so) have been posted, and can be downloaded from, this website:
Seminar Topics (with links)
1 - My search for the Sabbath at Vatican University (see also here and here)
2 - The Sabbath as time for service (see also here)
3 - Divine rest for human restlessness (see also here and here)
4 - The Sabbath under crossfire part I (see also here)
5 - The Sabbath under crossfire part II (see also here and here)
6 - From Sabbath to Sunday: How it came about? (see also here and here)
A more recent video of Bacchiocchi’s Sabbath Seminar, on DVD, is available for purchase from his website on this page.
Some of the following books of Dr. Bacchiocchi are available online for viewing and/or downloading: [Click on Titles]
From Sabbath to Sunday [PDF]
The Sabbath in the New Testament [PDF]
The Sabbath Under Crossfire [PDF]
Divine Rest For Human Restlessness [PDF]
God’s Festivals In Scripture and History - Part 1 (Spring Festivals) [PDF]
God’s Festivals In Scripture and History - Part 2 (Fall Festivals) [PDF]
Immortality or Resurrection [PDF]
The Advent Hope For Human Hopelessness [PDF]
Wine In the Bible [PDF]
Wine In the Bible (Abridged) [PDF]
The Time of the Crucifixion [PDF]
Women in the Church [PDF]
The Marriage Covenant [PDF]
Hal Lindsey's Prophetic Jigsaw Puzzle [PDF]
Christian Dress and Adornment [PDF]
The Christian and Rock Music [PDF]
Christian Apologetics Seminar
The following ASI 2010 seminar by Subodh Pandit (MD) entitled “Come Search With Me—Let's Look For God” is an interesting view of the defense of the validity of the Christian Faith. As Pandit states, this is the product of 20+ years of his personal journey and observations as an “inquirer” (a.k.a “seeker”) and indeed does approach these issues from an “honest” perspective. See: Streaming Video [mp4] [mp3] [book].
Free Online 3ABN Programs Archive
Thousands of programs aired on the Three Angels Broadcasting Network (3ABN) are archived online at this website, and can be freely downloaded (in the “avi” video format). See also this 3ABN Video download site (which has the .wmv format).
New SDA Study Bible - Review
So SDA scholars have finally produced a Study Bible, the 12,000-note [John Nevin] Andrews Study Bible. (See this book of Acts online sample). For this literary achievement alone that is great, however it is still wanting. First of all, the underlying text is that of the New King James Version (NJKV) and secondly, these notes and comments are mainly non-exegetical. Unfortunately, this is a bad combination given that, for starters, the NKJV is roughly said, in my opinion, ca. 80% accurate in regards to having properly rendered the underlying original Hebrew and Greek text, let alone manuscript issues. This is compared to the New American Standard Bible (NASB) (1995) which is, again in my opinion, rougly ca. 90-95% accurate. It is not usually the role of a Study Bible to engage in exegetical commentary, however simply using the NASB as the underlying text would have been the best, and most responsible, thing to for this SDA publisher and these SDA scholars to have done as people entrusted with rightly “teaching God’s flocks,” however more costly it may be to obtain these rights from the NASB’s Lockman Foundation, (if any?). (Cf. e.g, this 25,000 (also much more detailed)-note NASB Study Bible by popular and/or well-known Evangelical preacher John MacArthur, of the Grace to You ministry.)
The NKJV may have been selected by these SDA Publishers because it is a popular version, especially among SDA, many of whom still long for a penitent return to the Bible that Paul used, the King James Version, however, just like a parent wouldn’t be hailed as a responsible if they bought corn chips and soda for their children’s breakfast, because ‘that is the children’s favorite snack food,’ these SDA leaders should have used the most accurate Bible version available today for this production.
And just in case the following also applies, even if implicitly: “If your (traditional/historical/preferred) doctrines, teachings and/or prophetic understandings cannot be sustained with proper (i.e., in exhaustive and comprehensive depth) exegetical Biblical studies, then guess what... it is these views that are unBiblical, and not vice versa.
So now with this “major task” accomplished, these SDA scholars can now turn to updating and/or publishing, in the light of recent Scholarly Biblical Research and Studies along with new (i.e., more precise) understandings, especially in Biblical Languages, a new Biblical Commentary set to update/replace the ones that were published, and updated sometime between 1953 and 1980; i.e., as far back as somewhere between 57 to 30 years ago! (In fact, the best that they will be doing in that “commentary” regard is a 2015 one-volume (1800 pages) ASB companion, Andrews Bible Commentary surely to, patronizingly and/or naturally/sequiturly, be as intellectually daft as the ASB.)
Pertinently, I have personally long observed that however “intelligent”, loving and faithful an animal/pet may seem to be, they are really basely actuated and controlled by selfish motives, i.e., what they must do in order to meet/satisfy one of their wants or needs. That is why e.g., one can silence a ferocious guard dog (not pointedly trained against this tactic) by simply feeding him a juicy cut of meat. And so, as selfishness is the Chief of Sins (see in this post), and the primary reason why this GC is going on, then God cannot allow such non-converted psyches in a realm where there will be no Selfishness. It can also be seen that if God considered animals to be so valuable or “redeemable” as with humans (cf. Gen 9:5-6), then He would not have permitted man to quasi-wantonly put them to death for various reason such as food and even sacrifices (Gen 8:20-21; 9:1-4). And this all actually represents the fact that it is indeed because of man’s fall/sin that animals have so quasi-wantonly die for various reasons, and that in order to facilitate the survival of man in now a sinful/broken world.
 Overall that Anchors of Truth Series on “Doctrines That Divide” (see 1st of 5 starting here), which, commendedly, addressed several (but not all) of the main passages which are given against SDA Beliefs was still, at best, ca. 70-80% accurate or correct (i.e., on average ca. 7-8 out of 10 per each of those presentations*). And it is that 20-30% of still spurious and shoddy answers that is still quite lethal to the cause of incontrovertible (Exegetical) Biblical Truth; and his “anchor” here is correspondingly neither weighty enough and/or properly fastened to stop the Supercargo Ship of unbiblical teachings.
* As it [manifestly, perhaps now only] was [see here] in the case with/against David Gates, with Doug Batchelor, it continuingly is not merely the substantive inaccuracies and errors that is the main spiritual problem, but, e.g., like King Saul of old (1 Sam 15:17-19, it is the egregious, pride-based knowing, “moronically” slothful indifference to doing the work/effort that is required to not so mislead his entrusted “flock” (Ezek 34:1-16; 18MR 247.1). (cf. here). And in the same category of Gates’ patent guilefulness, Batchelor himself similarly uses various, reverse-psychological, hoodwinking, con-artist ploys, such as mainly (dismissive) humor (as, at least priorly, patently expressed with a “Caveman Theology” misdirection), to try to get people to knowingly swallow those, actually, Spiritually speaking, cyananidal capsules.
 Also in this moronically, mindless end of studying/preaching the Bible is the seemingly exegetical, allegorical approach which treats the Bible like a, join-the-dot, cross-word puzzle with the English text; and as a textual derivative of the infamous Bible Code with its original languages (e.g., especially, lately, as a full-on development, Ivor Myers, and to a lesser extent and also in recent sermons, Peter Gregory).* What is resultingly presented seems to be true because of the surfacely conjectured, subjective connectedness, that, proportionally enough, mixes a literal exegesis with a subjective eisegesis, with, no less, SOP quotes to support these confused, unrooted conclusion. (Added to this, in Ivor Myers’ case, is the reverse-psychological ploy of repeatedly literally, faultingly, laughing at his audience who do not, even in advance, decipher his arbitrary (overstating) reasonings!??). The Early Church “Fathers” (=Scholars) went this “popular” route and it led nowhere but into spiritual blindness and Babylonian confusion, particularly by causing true Biblical exegesis to be undone. (See the excellent GYC 2011 Seminar entitled: Revelation, Inspiration, and Interpretation: Keys to Understanding Scripture, by Chester Clark III, which includes great expositions on this very important Biblical Hermeneutics issue.).
 Along these lines EGW says: “There is one point that I wish to lay before those who work in the Southern field. Among the colored people they will have to labor in different lines from those followed in the North. They cannot go to the South and present the real facts in reference to Sundaykeeping being the mark of the beast, and encourage the colored people to work on Sunday; for the same spirit that held the colored people in slavery is not dead, but alive today, and ready to spring into activity. The same spirit of oppression is still cherished in the minds of many of the white people of the South, and will reveal itself in cruel deeds, which are the manifestation of their religious zeal. Some will oppose in every possible way any action which has a tendency to uplift the colored race and teach them to be self-supporting.
 EGW also makes this point by saying: “The whole system of slavery was originated by Satan, who delights in tyrannizing over human beings. Though he has been successful in degrading and corrupting the black race, many are possessed of decided ability, and if they were blessed with opportunities, they would show more intelligence than do many of their more favored brethren among the white people. Thousands may now be uplifted, and may become agents by which to help those of their own race.” (SW 61).
 On some of the teachings of the Apostle Paul, indeed found in “the Bible”, the SOP says: “It was not the apostle's work to overturn arbitrarily or suddenly the established order of society. To attempt this would be to prevent the success of the gospel. But he taught principles which struck at the very foundation of slavery and which, if carried into effect, would surely undermine the whole system. (AA 459, 460).
 “Relatedly” cf. this altercation incident, -though Spectrum is not responsible for individual choices and belief of (reading) SDA members, nor does it authoritatively determine SDA Church policy/belief, therefore that outburst of claimed: “Phinehas action/“violence”” (Num 25:6-9ff) was moronically completely uncalled for, not to mention criminal. And in the claimed ‘Phinehas precedence’: (1) Phinehas executed judgement on the pointed guilty party, moreover in the provedly, very act, and not a relatively “random” person; and (2) as adultery was Legally punishable by capital punishment he had the lawful right to execute this judgement, and he did so with proof. So that person in that incident with a Spectrum Magazine report only had the “right” to file a lawsuit for whatever claimed legal grievance he believed he had against the (protected free speech) publication(s) of Spectrum and not physically assault a reporter from Spectrum. Or, at the very least, he could have started a writing ministry to expose all of the claimed falsities being published by Spectrum Magazine.
 By William E. Richardson - Andrews University. (The video of the funeral service for Dr. Bacchiocchi had been posted on his website (biblicalperspectives.com).
 And by now (i.e., November 5, 2012), having seen the Andrews Study Bible’s Notes, I can informedly say, versus, by prior suspicions, that, exegetical point-for-point, the MacArthur Study Bible is (LOL) at least 10X better than what SDA “Scholars” have produced. Perfect, comprehensively emblematic case in point: on Matt 2:2, first of all the NASB is more accurate here in translating the aorist puncticularly as: “saw” instead of the NJKV’s quasi-enduring: “have seen”. Now, as SDAs (should) know, the SOP says, as discussed in here, that:
 In manifest fact, the whole post-Flood permission by God for man then eat meat was a just trade off, in that the Earth had become so damaged by the Flood that agriculture would not be the same, and thus food would be more scare for man, thus threatening their very life and survival. So God justly permitted man to take the life of an animal to most effectively preserve/sustain their own, but as God pointed out, that, even emergency, life-taking would not be without a just cost, as the taken life of the animal would be ‘taken from’ the possible longevity of man. (Gen 9:5).